Sadness surrounds closing of Berkeley Patients Group

Security guards check the credentials of a patient on the last day of operations of Berkeley Patients Group. Photo: Frances Dinkelspiel

The mood was somber Monday at Berkeley Patients Group as the 12-and-a-half-year old cannabis dispensary got ready to shut its doors.

Like every day, patients streamed in at a steady rate, handing over a doctor’s prescription and driver’s license to get inside. But many of them were also greeted with a hug and expression of gratitude.

“I want to thank you ladies for coming on our last day,” Joshua, a supervisor in the safety department who was working the security detail at the front door said to two patients. He asked that his last name not be used. “You will always be in our hearts and minds.”

Berkeley Patients Group is closing because the federal government informed its landlord, David Mayeri, in November that it might seize his assets if cannabis operations were not stopped. The letter from U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag was part of a broad-based crackdown on cannabis operations around California, a push that has resulted in the closure of dozens of medical marijuana dispensaries. Berkeley Patients Group, which has 13,000 members, is the largest and oldest dispensary to be affected, however.

Berkeley Patients Group agreed in a legal settlement with Mayeri to stop all sales of cannabis by May 1. The collective will clean up and vacate the premises by June 1, according to Brad Senesac, a spokesman for the group.

Berkeley Patients Group is not going out of the medical cannabis business, however. It is planning to launch a delivery service while it looks for a new location.

A huge banner announcing the service hung Monday in the back of the reception area, right behind the desk where all patients check in. “BPG Express. Coming Soon!” read the sign. “Sign up now to be among the first to receive our Exclusive Delivery Deals and Specials.” The delivery service will launch in late May, said Senesac.

Patients coming to BPG on its last day could see a banner advertising the new delivery service that will start in late May. Photo: Frances Dinkelspiel

The collective is still looking for a new location and has a number of promising prospects, said Senesac, who acknowledged it has not been easy to find a new space.

“We’re looking to move a 13-year old business,” he said. “We’ve been looking to move for five years. For us to expedite the move within the parameters set by the federal government, the state and local laws, we want to make sure we have the right location.”

BPG’s current 69 employees will be paid through the end of May,” said Senesac. If no new location has been found by then, BPG plans to bring in employment counselors to help the workers brush up their resumes and strategize on finding new jobs.

“If it’s going to be impossible to move, we’ll have an additional 69 unemployed folks in the city of Berkeley,” said Senesac.

Many employees and patients expressed sadness Monday that BPG was closing. They bemoaned the fact that it will be more difficult to get good quality medical cannabis in a safe and clean setting.

“This is tragic,” said Joshua, who has worked at BPG for three and a half years. “It’s really heartbreaking. The thing that hurts most is the ‘Helping Hands’ patients who can’t afford to pay for medicine. We give it to them for free. A lot of them have serious illnesses and it is really heart-wrenching to think they might not get their medicine.”

Mary Elizabeth Davis, a nurse who uses medical cannabis to alleviate the pain from severe osteoarthritis in her knees, said she will miss the feeling of camaraderie at BPG.

“This is my family,” said Davis, who has been a nurse for 42 years. “There are probably 100 people inside there,” she said, pointing to the lounge of BPG. “We said it feels like Thanksgiving. We are all so thankful. We are going to miss the whole community.”

Another patient asked Joshua what he should do to try and get the federal government to back off its pursuit of cannabis dispensaries.

“What do we need to do?” asked the man, who did not give his name. “Who do we write to? Who do we call? Who do we email? We’ve got to do something. This is my second home.”

The closure of BPG is the latest blow to an organization that just three years ago was doing so well it planned to export its brand across the country. Executives at BPG helped pass Berkeley’s Measure JJ in 2008, an ordinance that streamlined and clarified the city’s medical cannabis regulations. As states around the country started to adopt looser medical cannabis laws, BPG positioned itself as a consultant. In 2009 it sent a top executive, Rebecca DeKeuster, to Maine to lay the groundwork for a series of new dispensaries.

In November 2011, the co-founder and former president of BPG, Debby Goldsberry, filed a wrongful termination suit against the collective, alleging that its current leaders had inappropriately taken money from BPG to invest in the Maine endeavor, among other serious allegations. The lawsuit has since been settled, according to California Watch, which first reported the suit.

Local officials in Berkeley have been supportive of BPG, in part because it generates about $100,000 a year in taxes and donates as much as $200,000 annually to local charities. Critics of cannabis dispensaries, however, often contend that they are set up just to generate huge profits for their founders and that many of the patients are not sick but just use doctor’s prescriptions to get easy access to pot.

While BPG generates millions of dollars in sales each year, (California Watch reports that it brings in $19 million annually) most of that money goes to pay employees and is not used to line the pockets of the owners, Senesac said Monday.

While BPG is a corporation, it is a not-for-profit like Kaiser, he said. A salary survey conducted by a consultant hired by BPG determined that the executive salaries were in the mid-range of other executive salaries in the medical field in Alameda County, he said. (While Senesac did not reveal the results of that survey, legal documents filed against DeKeuster revealed she was paid $125,000 a year.) Senesac, who moved from Atlanta to Berkeley three years ago to work for BPG, added that he lives in an apartment, does not own a car, and rides his bike to work.

With all the uncertainty, all that BPG staff could do on Monday was convey to the dispensary’s clientele that things might turn around.

“We’re trying to let them know that although we are powerless here we still love them,” said Joshua. “I try to remind them that although we are closing, this is not the end. Hopefully we will find a new location and be up and running and serving medicine.”

Berkeleyside on Twitter

Get the headlines in your inbox

Most Commented

scot

Sadness? Many in the disabled community cheer that this “Club” has finally met a weel deserved demise. The flagrant way they abused the law, treated ill patients and profited hugely on the hard work of others made BPG a place that out of town drug dearers loved and most of Berkeley shied away from. As soon as it came out I got calls “Did you hear the good news?” Velvet rope “Clubs” for people to get referred to crooked M.D.’s that do not even check the patients medical records are a fraud and real patients suffer for it. Bye, Bye Berkeley Parasites Group.

bgal4

Pointless is an understatement.

Holland and Lord should be banned from commenting here, B-Side commenting can serve a positive function by not if these two are free to harass.

By checking the Disques community box you see they dominate the dialog while rarely adding new information to the discussion.

I have used B-Side to push out information learned in the local context from direct experience and engagement in the particular subject. I have also fed B-Side several stories.

The reason I went anonymous is because Holland created a website to harass me.
What does that say about B-Side moderating.

The Sharkey

Neurologists who take the time to answer e-mails from internet cranks do not an accurate sample group make.

The Sharkey

Pragmatic Progressive wrote:

This is why real scientists have to endure “teach the controversy” nonsense.

Which I suppose is part of why conversations with people like John are pointless.
He’s going to keep pounding at the topic until he can prove himself “right” and prove someone else “wrong” by doctoring his evidentiary demands and polling until he gets the answers he wants.

He’s not interested in researching the subject and trying to see why the neurologists that bgal4 spoke to said what they did, he’s just interested in trying to get enough data and organize it in a way so that he can “win” an internet discussion.

John Holland

Actually, it turns out that cannabis is much more controversial among neuroscientists than evolution is among biologists. More to come…

John Holland

My, my, are you in for a surprise. It turns out that very few of the neurologists I’ve been corresponding with agree with that statement. I’ll present my findings and raw data soon.

PragmaticProgressive

This is why real scientists have to endure “teach the controversy” nonsense.

PragmaticProgressive

I think your research skills need some tuning. Or perhaps you only find what you want to find. The Sharkey has summed it up very nicely already.

John Holland

Maybe there ~are~ plenty of national surveys.

John Holland

: )

bgal4

duh, I know wtf I am talking about fooland.

John Holland

“bgal4” wrote:

did you know one of the first warning people with Parkinson hear in support groups with experts, is try to stay away from hospitals in an emergency since they know nothing about treating the complications in PD.

I am occasionally called by an emergency room physician to be informed that Mr. Smith is being evaluated for “freezing” or increased tremors or some other aspect of his Parkinson’s disease (PD), and asked what would I advise. Usually I advise the ER doctors to tell the patient to call me the next day and get him out of the ER before anything bad happens.

bgal4

John,

did you know one of the first warning people with Parkinson hear in support groups with experts, is try to stay away from hospitals in an emergency since they know nothing about treating the complications in PD. Experts tell us if you have to go to the hospital make sure they contact your neurologist immediately because otherwise they are likely to misinterpret complaints and apply treatment that will worsen symptoms.

John Holland

I did at least did share my p.o.v. that those studies are isolated.

Bruce Love

You could call Sharkey on the scientifically illiterate way he’s abusing the psychosis meta-study (but please don’t bother — it’s not as if there’s any surprises here).

John Holland

By the way, if the risk is so high, why do you think doctors are performing studies on cannabis and Parkinson’s?

I made a big mistake. When “bgal4” said that medical marijuana “should not be prescribed” to Parkinson’s patients, I behaved as though she meant to imply that this was a universal proscription, and the accepted rule of thumb for Parkinson’s patients. I thought that the contraindication was absolute, but in fact it is relative. I actually did spend a lot of time using google, however, I did not query “psychosis” to make that connection. Bgal4, I’m sorry.

That said, what does this mean for Parkinson’s sufferers?

I also have to say that I personally believe those studies on psychosis to be rather isolated. However, I was wrong not to pursue that inquiry on google at the time.

Now, are you interested to learn what I am hearing back from neurologists? It’s actually pretty consistent with what I said above in my apology.

bgal4

you should have done more than hesitate, you should have controlled your impulse.

The Sharkey

Not only is bgal4 the one you should be apologizing to (since she’s the one you’ve been attacking), but that is one of the least sincere apologies I have ever read.

You even go on, in the same post, to continue to try to frame the discussion to say that your position all along has been the right one and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

John Holland

The Sharkey wrote:

For all the big talk you make about admitting when you’re wrong,

How can you reply to a message that begins with “My apologies,” where I describe my error, and say I’m not admitting I’m wrong? LOL.

I’ll say it again: My apologies. When I read “should not be prescribed”, I interpreted that to be absolute.

The Sharkey

She stated the OPINION of SPECIFIC NEUROLOGISTS which is BACKED UP BY RECENT STUDIES.

– You assumed universality she did not state.
– You ignorantly assumed that contraindication was always absolute instead of relative.
– You didn’t take ten seconds to Google research psychosis as it relates to Parkinson’s

For all the big talk you make about admitting when you’re wrong, you sure as hell aren’t doing it now.

John Holland

“The Sharkey” wrote:

Your incorrect reading of her statement is the problem here, not what she said.

“bgal4” wrote:

They stated that marijuana negatively affects cognition and should not be prescribed since cognitive decline and dementia is a problem in PD.

My apologies. When I read “should not be prescribed”, I interpreted that to be absolute. So I glad we’re in agreement that some Parkinson’s patients would benefit from medical cannabis. So do many of the neurologists I’ve been corresponding with this morning.

I feel much better now.

The Sharkey

You wil never find complete agreement from all scientists in any emerging field. Ever.

The Sharkey

John wrote:

In other words, if you’re suggesting that some Parkinson’s patients
might benefit from medical cannabis, while others may not, then I
believe we’re in radical agreement.

Then you agree with bgal4 as well, since that’s all that she said. Your incorrect reading of her statement is the problem here, not what she said.

Further, I am saying that based on what I have read (not much I admit) most Parkinson’s patients will see immediate short term benefits from cannabis but those benefits may also have significant long term consequences.

Despite being wrong in your reading of her statement and despite making virtually zero legitimate attempt at doing even the most basic Google research on the topic you continue to badger and harass her even after being shown that her statement was correct.

I’m at a loss for what to do at this point.
I’m glad I made an attempt to correct you for the benefit of other people who might be reading this, but we’ve reached the point in the discussion where I’m tired of wasting my time trying to reason with someone who refuses to be reasonable.

Bruce Love

Laura, I hesitate to say this because I’m sure you have negative feelings towards me but this is friendly advice:

You made some factual claims that were wrong as part of a political argument. John called you on it and gave lots of evidence that those claims were wrong. If you were to say “John, yeah, I got those facts wrong…” you’d both “win”.

Whenever it comes to that, though, you instead get very defensive, talk about your victimization, talk about what a bad person John is, and so on.

If you really want to take the wind out of those particular sails of his it’s easy: just admit he’s right when he is. It wouldn’t say anything bad about you other than you mis-spoke — and even then you will have corrected it. Then he’s got nothing to hold against you and the public discourse is (after a very rough patch) incrementally improved by an increase in being reality-based.

The Sharkey

“MEET MY DEMANDS AND THE ANIMOSITY BETWEEN US SHALL BE OVER! YOU MUST OBEY BECAUSE I AM THE GREAT AND POWERFUL JOHN FROM BERKELEY”

;-)

John Holland

“bgal4” wrote:

you ignore the recent violent robbery of 3pg at his sister shop in Vallejo

I don’t deny for a second that people use medical cannabis recreationally. That’s obvious.

However, there haven’t been any national surveys on the subject. Agreed?

“bgal4” wrote:

Maybe malpractice applies since we are now learning that the MM industry claims to be part of the medical field.

As well it should.

bgal4

the website you created reads like a STALKER wrote it. that is how clear it is.

bgal4

No John, you f…. with me in your obsession to publicly humiliate me with your stupid website, you ignore the recent violent robbery of 3pg at his sister shop in Vallejo and pretend that MM is not a recreational drug source.

Maybe malpractice applies since we are now learning that the MM industry claims to be part of the medical field.

John Holland

To everyone- I apologize for having to respond to his online, but since the issue was raised publicly here, here I go. This is the last I will say about this in this thread:

“bgal4” wrote:

You have truly offended me by trying to malign my character

I’m so sorry you see it that way, because I believe you have a great deal of fine character. I’ve said that repeatedly, and I’ve been specific about what I mean when I say that.

I think you have two facts wrong. That’s it

Why can’t we just talk about those two facts? Your unwillingness to do so is what makes me feel like I have to second guess everything else you say.

Based on emails from neurologists today, I think you’re more right about Parkinson’s than I thought, but not completely right, if I understood you correctly.

I’m not out to get anyone. If I were, why would I share the responses I’m getting from neurologists that agree with your earlier assertion? I’d just keep them to myself.

If we can agree on two things: 1. That shootings are extremely uncommon in dispensaries 2. No national studies exist on recreational vs. medical users, then we’re done. Animosity over. That would be my preference, because I don’t like the tension around this open-ended question either. It should also be simple, as I’ve provided data to support those assertions.

If you don’t agree on those two things, please present your data.

It’s not about you. I don’t even know you. How much clearer can I be about that?

bgal4

Close but the picture is even more complicated.
remember what I wrote, psychosis is a potential side effects from the medications required to treat PD. btw PD is degenerative not terminal.

thanks for supporting me, I merely wanted to call BS on the MM industry for not investing in developing dosage standards for the products they make big $$ selling and the obvious medical conflicts this lack of information creates.

It was a mistake since JH is heartless.

bgal4

Again, In your rush to publicly abuse me of my personal experience and knowledge you have COMPLETELY misrepresented what I information I shared or questioned.

bgal4

John,

I think you just CONVINCED me then even B-Side is an UNSAFE place on the internet to communicate within a community.

The context in which I shared that results of my efforts to obtain studies was in questioning the IMPORTANT matter of DOSAGE.

No one dispensing MM would disagree about the FACT that a patient does not have sufficient information about the amount of THC in the product they consume or what is a proper range for dosing when you are already using meds to regulate or enhance neurotransmitters action.

try googling drug addiction and dopamine and think hard.

why do you think some PD patients exhibit physical and mental responses similar to meth users.

You have truly offended me by trying to malign my character and intent in sharing concerns that the MM industry makes claims without INVESTING in dosage R& D.

Clearly you have no idea what it is like to cope with something as tragic as a brain disorder.

John Holland

bgal4 wrote:

This was distressing to our family, since the the researchers and the clinicians were not in agreement.

I missed this before. Would you be able to describe the professional general disagreement without delving into private health matters? If so, I would be interested to hear. If you would rather not, I completely understand.

The reason I ask is that there is definitely disagreement from the neurologists responding to my email. Some reflect the position you have stated before, and others seem less dogmatic. (Although The Sharkey seems to be suggesting that in fact, your recounting of the neurologists doesn’t suggest dogmatism, either.

John Holland

In other words, if you’re suggesting that some Parkinson’s patients might benefit from medical cannabis, while others may not, then I believe we’re in radical agreement.

John Holland

Edit. Replied to the wrong comment.

John Holland

So, what is the point? Should all Parkinson’s patients categorically avoid medical cannabis based on this, or might it be appropriate for some Parkinson’s patients?

Because bgal4 made it sound like all Parkinson’s patients should avoid it. Did I just get that wrong?

John Holland

Fair enough. sorry.

bgal4

John,

I am been subjected to undue scrutiny of my claims by you for a while.

Let me just say, this one cuts close to the bone. In our case my brother was young, very young, his life taken from him, cursed to suffered daily.

Of course what I said is accurate. Do you have any idea what family does to learn, care, manage chronic degenerative illness.
I spent years reading.

John Holland

Apparently, not all neurologists agree with you. Some, do, but not all.

It will make for an interesting blog post.

John Holland

I’m not asking her for any personal/private health information. Her health is none of my business.

But general information she volunteers about a discussion with doctors seems fair to discuss.

The Sharkey

The self-reporting mail-in survey that the comment you link to refers to is hardly what I would consider a rigorous study.

3 reputable doctors or hospitals on the WHOLE Internet that say, “marijuana is contraindicated for Parkinson’s”.

Is that what you mean by narrow? It seems pretty generous to me.

John Holland

The result of putting those two facts together won’t give you the kind of absolute YES/NO answer you’re demanding. It’s just an indication of an increased risk for a specific side effect in a terminal disease.

Agreed. But Laura presented it not as an increased risk, but as an established contraindication.

But wait, it’s not over. Neurologists are writing back, and it looks like bgal4 may be right. Hang tight.

The Sharkey

You want to know what I think? I think you frequently go out of your way to badger other posters – so much that you introduce your petty arguments into threads where they aren’t appropriate. I think you sometimes set up impossibly narrow parameters for what you consider acceptable data, and then attack people who are unable to provide you with black-and-white responses. I think you use ridiculously twisted language to demean and insult people who you have intellectual disagreements with.

In general I agree with you on this issue, but your discussion tactics are often disgusting, frustrating, and counter-productive.

Doc

Perhaps the medical discussion needs the following preface: under federal law only negative research on marijuanna is permitted. You can gain exemption from federal schedule for research only if you are trying to prove the harm, not benefit of marijuanna. So far no harm has been thus established. Many practicioners report clinical positive results, certainly many users claim to benefit. However the DEA refuses to allow these results to be certified, despite calls from the New England Journal of medicine and other sources for further inquiry. Study of the link of cancer to marijuanna surprisingly shows human risk goes down with moderate use, stress being a leading cause of cancer.

The Sharkey

Sorry, John. I was trying to actually read a little bit more about the subject and provide a thoughtful response. That takes a little bit more time than my usual snarky replies.

John Holland

FYI, I emailed some neurologists, and got my first response back, and the doctor agrees with bgal4. Excellent. I’ll keep everyone updated with other responses.

“They all responded that research studies for marijuana use in PD would
not occur because marijuana is contraindicated in Parkinson. They stated that marijuana negatively affects cognition and should not
be prescribed since cognitive decline and dementia is a problem in PD.”

bgal4 – She’s talking about a personal event in which she was asking doctors about medical marijuana treatment for Parkinson’s because she has a family member with Parkinson’s.

The Sharkey

John, I mean this in all kindness, but you’re being an ass. I usually really like your contributions to this site and think you’re a pretty funny guy, but when you go off on tirades like this you just make yourself look bad.

The study that indicates that cannabis can lead to an increased risk of psychotic disorders in patients who are already at-risk for psychosis is relatively new. It assesses a long-term risk – a risk that would be even longer-term in Parkinson’s patients since psychosis appears to be something that occurs only during the latest stages of the disease. From skimming the studies you linked to, most appear to be older than the study about the increased risk of psychosis. Additionally, most seem to be short-term studies – studies which would not have followed the patients from the time of the study to end-of-life.

When you say that you want web links to a set number of hospitals/doctors saying that, “in straightforward way, specifically say that marijuana is
contraindicated for Parkinson’s and that Parkinson’s patients shouldn’t
use it,” you just show that you probably haven’t spent much time in hospitals and don’t know how good doctors talk about these kinds of things with their patients.

40% of Parkinson’s patients will develop psychosis later in life. There’s a new-ish study that shows that the use of marijuana can increase the likelihood of developing psychotic symptoms.

The result of putting those two facts together won’t give you the kind of absolute YES/NO answer you’re demanding. It’s just an indication of an increased risk for a specific side effect in a terminal disease.

John Holland

Who am I badgering about private health issues?! That’s ridiculous. I respect everyone’s medical privacy, and I expect the same courtesy.

John Holland

This doesn’t mean it’s contraindicated. It’s a risk factor. Show me a medical professional who connects the dots like you do.

Won’t happen.

John Holland

Crickets. Sorry, BPL!

John Holland

bgal 4 made it sound categorically black and white. It’s not even close.

The Sharkey

So information isn’t real if it isn’t presented in the extremely narrow way that John Holland wants it to be presented?

John Holland is unable to put 2 + 2 together to see why a recent study showing that marijuana can lead to a 40% increase in risk of psychosis for individuals who have disorders for which psychosis might be a side effect could be cause for concern?

In a case like this doctors aren’t going to make black-and-white definitive declarations. It’s a matter of risk assessment, and only the patient can decide what they think is an appropriate risk.

There are more marijuana dispensaries in Berkeley than there are Walgreens. While I don’t appreciate the Federal crackdown, it’s not as if there aren’t a plethora of alternate places for these patrons to visit.

John Holland

The doctors said:

research studies for marijuana use [and Parkinson’s] would not occur because marijuana

The doctors said research studies would not occur, yet, there are plenty of studies on Parkinson’s and marijuana. How can that be if it is contraindicated?

Find me a 3 web pages that, in straightforward way, specifically say that marijuana is contraindicated for Parkinson’s and that Parkinson’s patients shouldn’t use it, and I’ll donate $100 to the Berkeley Public Library.

I’m not talking about some thought experiment like, “marijuana makes you crash your car, some Parkinson’s patients drive, and may crash their car.”

I’m just grateful you aren’t arguing that more cars stopped at Zachary’s corner!

The Sharkey

Amen to that. In my experience I’ve seen more shootings at/near check cashing locations than marijuana dispensaries. Not to mention that check cashing stores make grotesque profits preying on the poorest and most vulnerable members of society.

It’s a risk/benefits thing. Some Parkinson’s patients will decide that the immediate improvement in motor function from cannabis is worth the long-term increased risk of psychosis. Others won’t.

It took me less time to find this information than it’s taken you to collect links to badger other posters, yet you have the gall to complain in other threads about being badgered yourself.

John Holland

“The Sharkey” wrote:

I mean you created a website specifically to badger another poster from Berkeleyside for God’s sake.

No I didn’t.

I wrote those articles it up to counter false statements made here on Berkeleyside by an anti-compassion activist that demeans sick people. It’s not personal, it’s about acknowledging facts. I’ve never seen anyone so flagrantly cling to an assertion after they’ve been proven SO wrong. (as in the COMPLETE opposite).

This is especially important considering that now a new “fact” has been introduced: that “marijuana is contraindicated in Parkinson’s”. There’s not a single shred of evidence that I can find online to back that up, but I can find plenty of information that medical cannabis is help for Parkinson’s. I wonder if this is just a ploy to prevent Parkinson’s sufferers from getting their medicine?

Health is serious business, and truth in this debate is of utmost importance. Here’s an example. Just recently, U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag said:

People in the community may be supportive of the dispensary being in their community until there’s a robbery and people come running out of the dispensary shooting guns.

The only problem with this of course is that shootings at dispensaries are extremely rare. There have only been 6 shootings at dispensaries over the last 10 years.

There’s a difference between attacking someone and challenging their contrafactual statements.

It’s patently false that shootings are not uncommon and dispensaries, and that there are plenty of national surveys that show most medical cannabis users are recreational users.

What do you think, Sharkey? Do you think they were intentional lies, or do you think they were made up? I’d like to know your opinion.

Show me a source for the dubious claims, (or admit they were made up), and I’ll take the pages down. It’s that simple.

If you’re actually trying to find evidence and can’t, you’re a remarkably incompetent Google user. But more likely, you’re simply badgering someone online about their private health issues – something you complained about elsewhere in this discussion.

The Sharkey

I neither support or deny what bgal4 is saying, but it was pretty easy for me to find a report that suggests that Frequent users of cannabis have twice the likelihood of developing both psychosis and schizophrenia, and that it can hasten the onset of mental disorders.

LOL! There isn’t a shred of evidence online to suggest this contraindication.

Why should I believe it in absence of evidence?!

PragmaticProgressive

Man, you just keep trolling.

She told you that her sources said that MJ is contraindicated for PD. That means that there’s a reason for not using it that trumps reasons to use it. “do no harm” and all that. Scientists don’t waste time doing studies for which contraindications are already known. Your evident belief that mj is a panacea doesn’t make it so.

John Holland

Couldn’t find a darn thing. Not a single medical professional seems to have cared to write about the problem… Assuming the problem exists.

I’m Jes’ Sayin’

I once had office space right across the street from this building. It was a tool rental place at the time.

Our neighbors were, on the one side, Vital Vittles and Cheng Designs. On the other side was a tattoo parlor (albeit a ‘fancy’ one with a very well-know artist) and a check cashing place. Oh yeah, and the transient neighbors were the hookers who worked the corner at the light – sometimes chasing cars around the corner to make a ‘deal.’

This was hardly an uptown area before the Medical Marijuana place showed up.

bgal4

I checked your link, it is a start, search away.

there is plenty of science to learn, such as
nicotine is a neuroprotective in PD. how to deliver the benefits is not understood yet.

I provided you an accurate answer to your question.

google meth and Parkinson, you will find out that sensations meth users experience are also experienced in PD.

I mean, for example here’s what happens when I google “marijuana parkinson’s risk“. I want to believe you, but I don’t see any supportive evidence, only contrary evidence.

John Holland

I’m just asking for a link to any page that discusses this. Sounds serious.

bgal4

To understand dopamine transfer in PD Wikipedia is actually a good resource. Consider how adding an additional drug that increases or revved up the reactions of dopamine in the brain.

A few years ago I asked a couple of neuroscientists working at cutting edge of PD research for studies about marijuana use. They all responded saying that research studies for marijuana use in PD would not occur because marijuana is contraindicated in Parkinson. They stated that marijuana negatively affects cognition and should not be prescribed since cognitive decline and dementia is a problem in PD. This was distressing to our family, since the the researchers and the clinicians were not in agreement. The clinician who provided the MM prescription acknowledged the inherent risks but felt the compromise was worth some symtom relief, until an episode of psychosis resulted. Then it got complicated.

Before you challenge this, read the side effects of the meds required daily in advanced PD, they all list psychosis as a possible side effect. Add pot and viola.

there you go John, this will be the only response to you,
you know your history of harassing me.

Guest

That is simply nonsense: it doesn’t matter if there a Web site that purports to know what “symptoms” cannabis is or is not efficacious for, and how to treat them, because the information to back it up doesn’t exist. The recommendations for something like aspirin are based on decades of clinical experience with a variety of well-defined disorders; there is no equivalent body of evidence for cannabis. Furthermore, in order to treat with cannabis one would need to know the potency of the preparation, but reliable information on potency is rarely available to the user. To put it differently: in order for a physician to prescribe a drug, there should be an objectively verifiable disorder, and a body of evidence that clearly demonstrates that an agent, given in a certain dose at certain intervals, has a defined effect on that disorder. Those conditions are not met for the use of “medical cannabis”: if you think they are, I invite you to cite peer-reviewed evidence of the kind that is required to obtain FDA approval for the use of other drugs.

You know, the FDA is a wonderful institution. I would love to see medical uses of cannabis investigated using the standards applied by the FDA, because I think it is quite likely that there really are legitimate uses. But in the absence of the kind of evidence I have mentioned above, you are just using it to treat your logus of the bogus, or in other words to get high.

John Holland

“bgal4” wrote:

It is just more of the same, the poor get what is left over.

Unfortunately, isn’t that how healthcare in general works for the poor in the U.S.?

Actually, poor people don’t even get “leftovers” in U.S. healthcare. They simply don’t get treated.

John Holland

“Anonymous” wrote:

my particular ailments I prefer to keep secret as these are very personal

Amazingly, privacy of health is one of the most cherish personal privacies, and you’ll still find troglodytes who want to publicly speculate on your health and how you manage it. (Usually anonymously). I suppose it’s just another form of bullying, but it’s most certainly bad manners.

John Holland

I have seen first hand the dangerous result of too strong a dosage of MM for Parkinson patients.

Would you please link to some information on that. Seeing as the propaganda is that MM is great for many Parkinson’s, it would seem necessary to link to the information that counters that perception.

dispensary “pharmacist” have not been able to complete the chemical analysis to properly prepare dosage instructions for patient pot use, this can actually be dangerous

i.e. Parkinson disease, MM pot advocates claim the medical science support use for pain, muscle spasms in PD, yet they have not bother to determine what the correct dosage would be SAFE since marijuana affect dopamine and people with PD take dopamine around the clock.

I have seen first hand the dangerous result of too strong a dosage of MM for Parkinson patients. Not SAFE.

John Holland

Agreed. If “executive” meant people who were running the joint, and taking the risk, fine. But I find that pretty high for a “bud-tender”.

The Sharkey

It’s true, pharmacists do get paid well. I wonder what percentage of the employees at BPG have been to pharmacy school or had a similarly rigorous education in a medical field that would justify their salary…

John Holland

I can’t see this without logging into Facebook, and I neither have nor want to have a Facebook account.

Ditto. I appreciate the viral nature of facebook for political organizing, but only about half the population really uses it, at most.

Actually, laboratories have been breaking it down for us here and abroad. You can go to sites like Stickyguide and check off illnesses or symptoms and get recommendations based on your individual needs.

And your partly right. Cannabis is actually more like over the counter medicines. It requires user titration. Aspirin gives you a suggested dosage range of something like 2-4 pills every 4-6 hours not to exceed X pills in 24 hours. Cannabis is the same except there is no danger of toxicity. The rest of your assertions are simply opinion and not fact, but I’m glad cannabis receives your completely anonymous approval for recreational use.

John Holland

executive salaries were in the mid-range of other executive salaries in the medical field in Alameda County

“bgal4” wrote:

So the manager at the local pharmacies takes down an executive salaries?

No, because they are pharmacy managers. I imagine Walgreen’s executives take home executive salaries. Then again, nobody at Walgreen’s has to worry that 40 cops in riot gear are going to come streaming in and put a boot on their neck, but I digress.

Just like at Walgreen’s, my job is to safely advise people about the use of medical cannabis, not judge their eligibility. Nobody at Walgreen’s judges whether or not you might be abusing that Vicodin you’re picking up. It’s not their job.

A few days ago, I helped a man and his wife at my job. At one point she started crying because she has cancer and she is scared. That made him start crying, which in turn got me choked up. I see that every day. Real people with real illnesses.

I can’t speak with knowledge on your meeting but will regard that with the credence an anonymous post deserves. My condolences in regard to the illness in your family. Care-taking is extremely stressful for family members, but often the only financially feasible option. I’m sorry you were put in that position.

Berkeley Patients Group has had a compassionate care program that supplies low income patients with free medication for the almost the entirety of it’s existence.

Anonymous

You’re not seeing the big picture. The “abuse” and “recreation” you’re referring to puts doctors at fault, not the dispenser. Now these profits cannot be taxed, and the black market will rise. How do you feel about drug cartels in northern California? It’s about to happen whether we want it to or not, because regardless of whether or not some individuals abuse it, there are those who actually need it, and many of BPG’s clientele will likely flock to dealers. And being a former user myself, (my particular ailments I prefer to keep secret as these are very personal)…I do not pretend that I ever really truly needed it like I might need insulin for my diabetes…but I’ve seen patients who do, and it is VERY disheartening and unfortunate that these individuals are suffering as a result of a political agenda.

bgal4

So the manager at the local pharmacies takes down an executive salaries? Hardly.
Walgreens is just another corp business profiting from distributing medications.

please don’t even try that medical crap with me, I was a legit caregiver (non-user) of an ACTUALLY serious ill family member for several years. On a weekly basis I witnessed the prioritizing of sales for recreational use at the dispensary over the proper care and respect for the very people Prop 215 was meant to assist.

I took responsibility to confront these failures by speaking at the MM commission. One of the former BPG board members met with us to develop specific reforms for supplying extremely low income disabled folks. Those reforms were never implemented.

Before somebody tries to explain to me that I can’t tell from the appearances who deserves the right to buy pot, save it, I worked in the medical field for over 25 years, and my brother’s illness fooled plenty of inattentive people, or maybe they were just stoned.

Guest

It isn’t medicine. “Medical field” refers to people working in traditional medicine, i.e., physicians, nurses, etc. Cannabis inhabits a strange space of its own. It may have legitimate medical uses, but its legal status has severely inhibited the sort of objective investigations that physicians use to establish safety and efficacy. California law allows it to be sold to people who have been judged by a physician to have a disorder that can be ameliorated by cannabis. But it is not dispensed by pharmacies, and no measured therapeutic dose is either prescribed or dispensed: this makes it different from any drug that would be prescribed by a physician and dispensed by a pharmacist (or sold over the counter). Anyway the complaints for which it can be “prescribed” are often vague and there is a general understanding that it can be used for whatever ails you, up to and including life in general. To put it bluntly, the great bulk of the “medical cannabis” in California is used for recreational purposes, and it has little or nothing to do with medicine as most of us understand it.

As for me, I regard the charade of “medical cannabis” as useful: it is another illustration of the ridiculous status of this relatively benign recreational substance, kept by many households only for “medicinal” purposes. It may have some modest place in the medical pharmacopeia, but we don’t quite know just where because the laws make it so difficult to investigate.

This is how marijuana was made illegal:
“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”.
“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”.
“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”.
“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”.
“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”.
“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”.

This is how it is kept illegal (and all 3 requirements MUST be met):
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.”

There is no truth behind prohibition, only lies which the government
uses to wage war on us. That is called tyranny. No taxation without
representation.

Everyone wants to sign, but there are not enough signature gatherers out there, please plug into the campaign on FB, help in some real way such as donating money to pay for shipping petitions statewide, there is one month left.http://www.cchhi2012.org/

The Sharkey

I can’t see this without logging into Facebook, and I neither have nor want to have a Facebook account.
Is there an alternate website for this group? Can you summarize their goals?

If this is an attempt to fully legalize, tax, and regulate marijuana for medicinal/recreational use I’d love to sign the initiative.

There is a statewide initiative underway, signature gatherers are needed. Those who want to change the laws have until June 2, 2012 to qualify it for the ballot. About 300 more signature gatherers are needed right now. Out of state people can help by leaving messages like this one in California news forums. Calif Cannabis Hemp Health Initiative 2012. Can’t gather signatures? Make a donation right now. https://www.facebook.com/groups/cchhi2012/

Doc

Like Chez Panisse and the Rep., BPG is one of the great institutions that make Berkeley a special place.

The Sharkey

If the results from the salary survey are “normal” why won’t BPG release the report?

If I was trying to garner community support I don’t know if I’d want to compare myself to Kaiser. Personally I have had pretty good experiences with them but there’s a lot of hate for Kaiser out there.

bgal4

While BPG is a corporation, it is a not-for-profit like Kaiser, he said.
A salary survey conducted by a consultant hired by BPG determined that
the executive salaries were in the mid-range of other executive salaries
in the medical field in Alameda County, he said.